- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:06:21 +0900
- To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2018/04/11-wot-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Michael Koster!
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WoT-IG/WG
11 Apr 2018
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Agenda
Attendees
Present
Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Daniel_Peintner,
Dave_Raggett, Fano_Ramparany, Graeme_Coleman,
Kunihiko_Toumura, Matthias_Kovatsch, Michael_Koster,
Michael_Lagally, Ryuichi_Matsukura, Soumya_Kanti_Datta,
Taki_Kamiya, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Toru_Kawaguchi,
Zoltan_Kis, Barry_Leiba, Darko_Anicic, Kazuaki_Nimura,
Sebastian_Kaebisch, Kazuo_Kajimoto(only_on_IRC)
Regrets
Chair
Matthias, McCool, Kajimoto
Scribe
mjkoster
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]agenda - recap of f2f and review the minutes, task
force review
2. [5]f2f summary
3. [6]Next ToDos
o [7]Binding Templates
o [8]Scripting API
o [9]Thing Description
o [10]Security
o [11]Testing
4. [12]AOB
* [13]Summary of Action Items
* [14]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<kaz> scribenick: mjkoster
agenda - recap of f2f and review the minutes, task force review
Matthias: agenda bashing?
McCool: recharter topic
<kaz> +1 about rechartering
f2f summary
<kaz> [15]f2f agenda
[15] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_24-29_March_2018,_Prague,_Czech_Republic
<kaz> [16]f2f minutes
[16] https://www.w3.org/2018/03/23-29-wot-minutes.html
Matthias: main decisions are to simplify TD and use json-ld 1.1
... benefits are higher than the risks of this dependency
... the other f2f discussion was the rechartering; the roadmap
and changes due to rechartering
... on the json-ld 1.1, we concluded that we could reference a
working draft to reduce the dependency risk
<kajimoto> Yes, so rechartering might be better to be said as
extension
<kaz> [17]f2f minutes
[17] https://www.w3.org/2018/03/23-29-wot-minutes.html
Kaz: readout of the minutes from prague meetings
... readout of action items summary
... summary of decisions/resolutions from the prague f2f
McCool: agreed to create a simplified life cycle diagram in the
architecture spec
... and we would expand on this for each document
Kaz: also initial discussion on Testing
<kaz> [18]discussion on the testing plan
[18] https://www.w3.org/2018/03/23-29-wot-minutes.html#mar29-item01
<McCool> [19]https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/testing
[19] https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/testing
<kaz> [Plan for Testing (excerpt from the f2f minutes)]
* Investigate Spec Tracking tools
+ Kaz - to investigate W3C requirements and tools - two
weeks
+ Michael Lagally to work with Kaz
+ Two weeks from now
* Update specifications with clear normative assertions
+ Per Task Force - person assigned
+ Target date: 1.5 months from now
* Extract normative assertions
+ Ideally automatic... but worst case, manual
+ Target: 2 months from now
* Update Test Definitions
+ Per deliverable - satisfy W3C requirements
+ Should track specification updates
+ Could associate with pull requests
+ Target date: 3 months from now
* Implementation tests
+ Compare with current tests -> check off definitions
+ Target date: 3.5 monhts from now Fill gaps
Kaz: in binding meeting 4/10, we agreed to create a TF for
testing, starting discussion in the wot repository github
issues
... please review the minutes and comment
Next ToDos
<inserted> -> @@@ Matthias' slides
* Binding Templates
Matthias: start with binding templates summary
... ToDos include Action and Event patterns and MQTT
<kaz> [20]Binding Issue 41
[20] https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/41
McCool: what is considered stable? when is the document stable?
Koster: stable is a developer could implement a binding and not
expect much change, know what's in and out
Matthias: testing would be out of scope for mid-May
<McCool> McCool: OPC-UA issue:
[21]https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/42
[21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/42
* Scripting API
Matthias: next topic: scripting API
... decided to use a working branch and sync to master when
everything is consistent
<zkis> [22]https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/541
[22] https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/541
Daniel: discussion on semantic integration with WebIDL
Zoltan: example of getting @type using maplike access with
webIDL
... we don't expect any changes to WebIDL would be considered
Matthias: OK if we have a simple version without semantic
annotation for mid-April
... discovery API needs to be improved and included by end of
April
<kajimoto> I agree with Matthias.
* Thing Description
Matthias: next topic: [Thing Description]
<McCool> McCool: general comment, deadlines should be converted
to absolute dates... relative are confusing
Sebastian: next steps are specify the simplified TD
<kaz> [23]Sebastian's slides
[23] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/images/d/d9/TD_nextSteps_Prague2018.pdf
Sebastian: relying on json-ld 1.1 automatically allows
restructuring the TD around interaction names as key values
... also makes the syntax closer to json schema style and
enables global definitions in the file
... also we will be making semantic annotation optional
<McCool> McCool: base ending in / and links starting with /
legal?
(note) yes, it is the correct form. just like filesystem
paths... URIs starting with "/" are typically interpreted as
top of tree
Sebastian: changes to the use of @id, name
... adding author and version
... goal for end of April to have the first example of the
simplified TD
... TD freeze by early June
Matthias: make the example TD goal by May 2nd call
Sebastian: make the freeze date June 6th
<kajimoto> Then next plugfest in Seoul, all of participants' TD
should be deploy the latest TD, that is, JSON-LD 1.1 based. I
agree this policy.
McCool: when does my security metadata part need to be
submitted?
Matthias: May 2nd date
McCool: process discussion about when PRs submitted to which
branches in what order
* Security
<McCool> [24]https://github.com/w3c/wot-security
[24] https://github.com/w3c/wot-security
<McCool> [25]https://github.com/w3c/wot-security/pull/88
[25] https://github.com/w3c/wot-security/pull/88
* Testing
<McCool> [26]https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/testing
[26] https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/testing
McCool: testing should go into its own repository
... testing is an IG activity, so WG specific items should go
into the WG repositories
... summary of the files in the repository and some working
practices
... want to end up with a set of test definitions that
correspond to normative assertions
... MM is organizing right now and we probably need someone to
take over at some point
... but most of the work would be done in separate TFs
Matthias: planning to create a test suite repo for the actual
tests, separate from the framework and tools
McCool: yes, this repo is just for organizational and logistics
AOB
Matthias: AOB?
<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to mention 3 drafts were published on
April 5: Binding, TD and Scripting. See:
[27]https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/6945 and to ask about
the PlugFest call.
[27] https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/6945
Kaz: 2 points
... 1. three drafts (Binding, TD and Scripting) were published
on April 5th; blog post about that on the W3C top page
... 2. is there a plugfest call?
Matthias: my expectation is that PlugFest call ended for the
Prague meeting
Koster: right
... and no summary prepared today
Matthias: would expect it will resume early May
... let's put the plugfest summary on next week's agenda
<kaz> [adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [28]scribe.perl version
1.152 ([29]CVS log)
$Date: 2018/04/11 16:05:25 $
[28] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[29] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2018 16:07:31 UTC